Judge Andrews grants-in-part motion to preclude evidence concerning IPR

In Reckitt Benckiser Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. v. Watson Laboratories, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 13-1674-RGA; v. Par Pharmaceutical, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 14-422-RGA (D. Del. Dec. 16, 2015), Judge Richard G. Andrews granted-in-part Plaintiffs’ motion in limine to preclude Defendants from offering evidence at trial concerning the an inter partes review of a patent-in-suit.

Defendants were precluded from offering “the PTAB’s factual finding, decisions, and legal conclusions,” but would be allowed to offer opposing party statements admissible under FRE 801(d)(2).  Id. at 2.  The remainder of documents at issue appeared to be inadmissible hearsay, and the Court thus advised they should not be offered into evidence absent a exception.  Id.  The Court would permit Defendants at trial to lay a foundation for their expert to rely on a certain declaration from the proceedings (regarding another’s pH measurement), explaining that whether the expert could rely on such data was a factual question that was not amenable to resolution before trial.  Id.


%d bloggers like this: